The Detroit Tiger Weblog



« | »

Tigers draft Castellanos, Ruffin

The Tigers selected high school third baseman Nick Castellanos with the 44th pick in the draft. A few moments later they selected Chance Ruffin, a reliever from Texas.

Castellanos is a trademark Tigers/Chadd/Ilitch pick. A top talent who slides in the draft to where the Tigers are only too happy to snap him up.

Nick Castellanos – MLB.com Scouting Report

Chance Ruffin fits in the Tigers mold of polished college relief pitchers. He breaks the mold in terms of his size and stuff. His fastball is low 90’s and he only stands 6-1.

Chance Ruffin – MLB.com Scouting Report

David Chadd commented on the selections via conference call late Monday night:

Photo Credit: LakelandLocal

Posted by on June 7, 2010.

Tags: , ,

Categories: 2010 Season

15 Responses

  1. I just can’t see the Ruffin pick, other then saving money. We owe so much money to players being released and traded, maybe they don’t have the budget for the draft.

    by Michael on Jun 7, 2010 at 11:00 pm

  2. Ruffin only gave up 3 runs this year on 31 innings with 10 BBs and 50 Ks in closing situations. And Castellanos was the perfect pick, can’t pass up that much talent slipping so far.

    A+ draft for DD, well done!

    by TSE on Jun 7, 2010 at 11:05 pm

  3. Soooo excited about the Castellanos pick!
    Can’t believe he slid to the Tigers!

    Ruffin is a solid pick, even though there was top talent still on the board (Jenkins, who would be picked later, Cole(!), Cabrera, Allie).
    But overall, a very good first day!

    by DetroitTigersGeek on Jun 8, 2010 at 1:43 am

  4. Check out all these draft projections for Castellanos.

    http://macksmets.blogspot.com/.....-nick.html

    by TSE on Jun 8, 2010 at 4:06 am

  5. I never think very highly of college reliever picks. It’s setting the ceiling too low.

    Castellanos sounds exciting. It would be terrific if he signed soon and played a bit this year. Probably too much to ask.

    Hope the plans for today include a high caliber starter who’s dropping like Paxton.

    by tc chris on Jun 8, 2010 at 8:45 am

  6. At last – something got precedence besides outfielders, 1st basemen and pitchers. Oh wait…

    by Vince in MN on Jun 8, 2010 at 3:07 pm

  7. We can’t win the WS anyhow, no point in rushing his development. Heck only 5 teams in the AL have less wins than us right now. We should be patient until our team is ready to move forward. Plus we need Inge to every chance to raise his trade stock since DD is taking FOREVER to make deals.

    by TSE on Jun 8, 2010 at 4:55 pm

  8. I meant that I hope Castellanos plays in Oneota or wherever the Tigers have rookie league teams. He’s 3 years away from the bigs, minimum, I’m sure.

    by tc chris on Jun 9, 2010 at 8:35 am

  9. Somehow I think we’d be better off with him in the lineup than Everett. He should be able to already out play him without any development whatsoever. I’d take that gamble any day. So yeah it’s nice to let guys take their time and develop, but that’s only optional, and as far as a minimum, one does not exist in our case of having such a shortage of professional caliber hitters.

    by TSE on Jun 9, 2010 at 11:41 am

  10. How does an organization with no stellar SS prospects go the 1st 15 rounds without drafting one? I stopped following draft tracker after round 15, but how does DD in good consciense ignore a position that has been a weakness ever since Guillen’s body couldn’t take the demands of the position (in other words for three years). We can’t continue to run shortstops out there who have no power and struggle to hit .260. C’mon Dombrowski, you can only have so many arms in one organization.

    by Jerry The Tiger Fan on Jun 9, 2010 at 11:42 am

  11. Because their philosophy is to take the best player available with a bias towards pitching (particularly power pitching), which is generally a sound strategy. You can always trade pitching to fill other holes.

    It also might have been a function of the draft pool, where some positions are thinner than others. It doesn’t make sense to take a SS that you rated 150th on your board over an outfielder that you have rated 75th, even to fill a need.

    I would also point out that C is another area that’s thin and they took a bunch of catchers, so I guess you can only fill one hole at time.

    by Mark in Chicago on Jun 9, 2010 at 1:23 pm

  12. You don’t draft for need in baseball. You take the best player on your board that you can sign. The development arc is too long to draft for need.

    by billfer on Jun 9, 2010 at 9:35 pm

  13. when you are drafting high school players just as many as college players there is just no way of knowing. .Plus.like Billfer said the development arc is too long…we are talking 17-18 year old kids….funny even watching the draft because the announcers know nothing about 80 %-90% of the players drafted….or never even, ever, heard of them…it is a crap shoot at best….no way of telling if that player fills your needs unless its a Strausburg or a Porcello

    by jud on Jun 10, 2010 at 12:10 am

  14. Uhhh……not one SS in the first 15 rounds? I’m not saying take a SS in the first round come hell or high water, but to ignore that position (generally considered the most important after pitching) entirely is just weird. You’re telling me that no shortstops in the first 15 rounds enticed the Tigers enough to take a flier? As far as the other poster goes (you can only fill one hole at a time in regards to catcher)…………..there are 50 freakin’ rounds. You can draft four position players at each of the eight diamond positions and still take 18 pitchers. In other words, grab 4 or 5 shortstops and let them develop over the next several years. How does not drafting any shortstops help alleviate the problem? Also, the development arc is longer for a SS than a pitcher or a catcher? Sorry, I’m not buying that malarkey.

    by Jerry The Tiger Fan on Jun 10, 2010 at 1:21 am

  15. I haven’t seen the Tigers draft board, but I’d venture a guess and say that when the Tigers made their selections, the available shortstops weren’t at the top of their board.

    Why grab 4 or 5 shortstops if you’re not high on any of them? And just because they may draft 50, only half that many will actually sign.

    Nobody said that the development arc was longer for shortstops than for other positions. The development arc for baseball players is too long to draft for need.

    In 2008 they didn’t set out to draft a bunch of college relievers, but when their picks came up college relievers happened to be at the top of their board. It’s not that difficult of a concept.

    by billfer on Jun 10, 2010 at 7:10 am

« | »




Recent Posts


Pages



About The Detroit Tiger Weblog

About the Site Detroit Tigers Weblog was launched in July, 2001. At the time it was the only Tigers blog and it resided as a blogspot page. There were multiple authors and it mostly consisted of links to the rare times the Tigers were mentioned in the national media. We only had a few dozen […]more →

Switch to our desktop site